User talk:CodexJustin

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 17:52, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

January 2019
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Andrei Rublev (film) has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you.  freshacconci  (✉) 22:12, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That was not a test edit. I have added the link to it this morning. CodexJustin (talk) 16:37, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Bizot group) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Bizot group.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Britishfinance (talk) 11:21, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Herman Melville
I have noticed this GA candidate you have nominated. Have you considered completing your user page? That would be helpful to the GA nom. Hoppyh (talk) 23:50, 29 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I stand corrected—after reviewing the GA guidelines, I see that full WP registration is not a prerequisite for making the GA nom. Hoppyh (talk) 15:21, 30 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Started a user page today. If you might be eventually interested in taking up the Melville article nomination then let me know if I could add more to it. CodexJustin (talk) 18:42, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of The Passion According to Andrei for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Passion According to Andrei is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/The Passion According to Andrei until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Britishfinance (talk) 17:11, 1 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I think that this is the best way to resolve the issues we have discussed-debated on this article; AfD is a fair process in my view (I spend plenty of time on it), and it is a good way to get other editors (and admins) engaged and feeding back on the situation regarding the article. We will see what views the produce. Kind regards. Britishfinance (talk) 18:32, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Herman Melville
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Herman Melville you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Alcmaeonid -- Alcmaeonid (talk) 11:40, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Green Book
Hello: You deleted my entry of "postscript" with the explanation that a postscript should not be under "production"in the above mentioned film. Are you opposed to postscript information in film articles or just the placement? It seems to me that editors are told to be bold but anything different is edited out. Please give me your views. Eschoryii (talk) 21:41, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. It would help if you could find a reliable source which discusses these postscripts with some purpose in mind. That way you could add a link to the reliable source to indicate the importance of the material you are choosing to include in the article. Normally, credits, graphics and postscripts are not discussed in the section where you placed them. If can find a reliable source to link then it might help. CodexJustin (talk) 14:45, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Favourite
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Favourite you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FrB.TG -- FrB.TG (talk) 17:01, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Favourite
The article The Favourite you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Favourite for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FrB.TG -- FrB.TG (talk) 20:21, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019
Hello, I'm TJRC. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Awkwafina, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. TJRC (talk) 00:07, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll add another link or cite from the film article which was already linked. CodexJustin (talk) 14:24, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Please don't use "Undid revision" as your edit summary when you are making an edit a second time correctly, rather than undoing an edit. TJRC (talk) 14:33, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

May 2019
Hello, I'm SNUGGUMS. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, so it has been removed for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:45, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The character of Ally played by Gaga starts the movie as portraying the daughter of Andrew Dice Clay as Lorenzo Campana, Ally's father. Her name changes midway through the film after the marriage. Since she appears as both the pre-marriage character and the after marriage character in the film, with the name change, both names should appear in the character descriptions. CodexJustin (talk) 15:25, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * You can't just presume one automatically shares their father's last name. Children can sometimes have their mother's last names instead even outside of cases where a father and/or child changes a last name for non-marriage purposes. Also, Ally is never at any point referred to with that last name, not even in the credits. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 17:09, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Both reliable sources at Vice and also at Vulture disagree with you here  and here . The article I think should go with reliable sources. CodexJustin (talk) 17:50, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I hadn't seen those pieces before, though they seem to be pulling that name out of nowhere when the film doesn't use it for her at all. SNUGGUMS (talk / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 19:20, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Now I am finding the NY Times here also taking a position that it is Ally Campana. When I asked someone about your name change comment above, their position was that changing back to the maiden name of a mother is rare and usually only happens when after a divorce the child is in the custody of the mother and the mother changes her name back after the divorce is granted. In this case, the plot of the film goes in the other direction with Gaga growing up with her father as the single parent and not her mother. With reliable cites going with Ally Campana as the maiden name, then it might be worth a mention with a cite added in the Casting section. Maybe you can make an edit with improved wording. CodexJustin (talk) 14:54, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Again, the film doesn't at any point call her by that last name, not even during the credits where she's just listed as "Ally". That was the bigger point I'm trying to make and you seem to be missing. I also have no recollection of anybody in the movie calling Ally's father "Campana" either nor any cast members using it when discussing A Star Is Born. Comments from the actors/writers would be better things to go by in this case (if I've missed something and someone involved in the movie has mentioned it). While I do know that The New York Times is overall a trustworthy source, they also don't have any discernible basis for "Campana". As for mothers' maiden names, it is true that doesn't happen much outside of cases where the mother has full custody or the child has a poor/strained relationship with the father, but you still shouldn't be so quick to just assume a child will automatically have their father's last name when he has any custody. Parents and children can theoretically have their last names legally changed to something completely unconnected to their families so I wouldn't rule that out. <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 15:24, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Move discussion to article talk page, where it should probably have started. CodexJustin (talk) 17:16, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

 * That IP editor appears to have settled down now, and I have made a nomination for peer review of the Basquiat article now. Well done on reverting that editor. CodexJustin (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jean-Michel Basquiat
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jean-Michel Basquiat you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 07:20, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jean-Michel Basquiat
The article Jean-Michel Basquiat you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Jean-Michel Basquiat for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 17:22, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Request for Navarro edits
Thank you for expessing your positive thoughts about my suggestions to the Peter Navarro article. I have decided to take a break from editing Wikipedia. Feel free to implement my suggestions to the article when the article is unlocked. Knox490 (talk) 22:16, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Corrections to comments that have replies
FYI, the two corrections in this edit should have been done as: Madruss Mandruss. That way, editors subsequently reading my comment "And it's Mandruss, not Madruss" are not left wondering what the hell I'm talking about. This loss-of-context effect has to be considered whenever you correct an earlier comment that has received one or more replies. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  07:47, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Noted. The discussion on the Talk page there has moved on to other topics. CodexJustin (talk) 19:20, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Requested copy edit of 2001: A Space Odyssey (film)

 * P.S. I didn't find the reviews you mentioned in your request where "Sources and prose were cited as inadequate". So, I'm not sure I addressed all issues involved there. There is one error-generating reference that doesn't have a title (a no-no for featured articles). I tried to find that detail in that particular issue of Sight and Sound (volume 40, number 2, Spring 1971), but to no avail, at least with my online resources. That will have to be fixed before article is taken to FAC, as well as some unusual citations where external links have been combined with Harvard referencing in understandable but apparently futile attempts to get short citations to point to specific pages. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:33, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing the copy edits. I did add the missing title you mentioned, let me know if there are any more. This is the message about the poor cites and writing quality control from a month ago here . Is there any way to get the year "2001" into the closing sentence of the plot section which was so important to Kubrick? Possibly you could also do a read through concerning the issues previously raised on quality control and if you think that the article and cites might need more effort prior to considering FAC or if they are sufficiently good. Your harvard cites look pretty good. Both of your edits have helped in significant ways for the article. CodexJustin (talk) 14:30, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , I checked a bunch of those harv ref / page number combos, and the ones I tried worked fine, like "Schwam 2010, p. 86" (currently note 162) and "LoBrutto 1998, p. 308" (currently note 64). If you know of any that aren't working, please let us know. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:15, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * That looks good, the only thing I found was cites #171 and #172 which don't seem to recognize each other for "Dirks, Tim." Otherwise the Harvard cites look good to me, maybe Dhtwiki has some follow-up. CodexJustin (talk) 15:21, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know what cites #171 and #172 which don't seem to recognize each other for "Dirks, Tim." means. Those references look and function fine for me, as far as I can tell. What are you hoping they will do that they are not doing now? – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:55, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I have just updated the access dates for both links. They appear to both be linking now. Thanks. CodexJustin (talk) 19:13, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * My specific example is ref. #170: . That merely takes you to a Google Books title page. Dhtwiki (talk) 20:21, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * There are two links in that tab; one is on the year designation when you scroll your mouse over it which gives the reference info, and the other is linked over the author name when you click on it and get the full article. It should work if you click on it, and let me know if there are other links which look suspicious. Otherwise I think the article might be getting close to a renomination, let me know what you think and Jonesey for his citation efforts. CodexJustin (talk) 14:29, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I took a look at the failed FA nomination. It was a later version than the one linked to above that mentions specific issues with the prose, some of which, maybe all, I know I dealt with. I'll try to go through the list and see if anything was missed, and especially whether there are any "fused participles" left, which I tend to avoid, although I'm so unfamiliar with that particular term that I had to look it up and (re-?)encountered the controversy surrounding their use. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:43, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Its looking pretty good to me. Did you have a chance to see if mentioning the year "2001" in the closing sentence of the plot is possible? Otherwise it looks like the harvard cites of Jonesey are also holding up. Let me know if I can add more or add clarification to any other sections. CodexJustin (talk) 15:14, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

The Irishman (2019 film)
Thanks so much for your improvements! I hope you will work on it again, since I personally want this article to be the best possible. I wish you a nice day! -- Mazewaxie ( talk  •  contribs ) 15:27, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The film is going into full distribution next week and there should be much editing activity at that time. Looking forward to it. CodexJustin (talk) 14:23, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

TheFamousPeople.com as a source
Hi CodexJustin. I noticed that you recently used thefamouspeople.com as a source for biographical information in Aida Garifullina. Please note that there is general consensus that thefamouspeople.com does not meet the reliable sourcing criteria for such information. (Discussions here and here). If you disagree, let's discuss it.

As far as frivolette.com is concerned, I can't find anything about it at all. It looks like a facade of some kind - public relations site perhaps. If you know anything about it, let me know.

Thanks. --Ronz (talk) 18:54, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting back on this. I am replacing the citations with one from People magazine with links, usually this is taken as a reliable source. I have seen photographs of her with her daughter, and possibly adding this to her article might help further. I think the People magazine citation works in this case. CodexJustin (talk) 14:41, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

19th amend
Hi there,

Just wanted to leave a note to say thanks again for your patience with that GAN. I've been hoping that the users who were involved in the development of the article would be participating in the review process, but thus far they seem to be unavailable. I still have every intention to continue with it. I just want to let you know that it's not a matter of not caring. Lots of work, dissertation, off-wiki volunteering commitments, work travel, etc. has been getting in the way. Bear with me a bit longer... :) --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:03, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

The Favourite

 * Hi CodexJustin, I've noted some places where citations are needed, particularly for direct quotations. There's some in 'Production --> Pre-production' and 'Soundtrack'. The subsection 'Reception --> 'Accolades' has no refs at all. I also think there's an over-reliance on direct quotations, some of which don't really say much. These problems will need fixing if you plan an FAC nomination. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  04:13, 18 November 2019 (UTC)


 * That was really nice of you to do those. All the cite templates I found are now taken care of for the benefit of other readers. If you have seen this film or would like to do further abridgements of some of the long quotes, or add explanations for them, then it would be nice to see your additions to the article. It would be nice if you could since the FA nomination usually needs helpers and if you liked the film maybe you could join in for the enhancements process. CodexJustin (talk) 15:56, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries; thanks for adding the missing citations, I usually point out such problems, especially for an FAC nom. The film sounds like fun but II haven't seen it. I'll pass on further development of the article –&#32;I'm more of a fixer than a content developer –&#32;but thanks for asking and good luck with your planned FAC nomination. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  20:42, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Delay
Sorry for not getting back to the review yesterday, I had forgotten about some obligations in meatspace that took up my time the last couple days. I should be back at it again tonight. Wug·a·po·des​ 22:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Herman Melville
The article Herman Melville you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Herman Melville for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Alcmaeonid -- Alcmaeonid (talk) 09:40, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Herman Melville
The article Herman Melville you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Herman Melville for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Alcmaeonid -- Alcmaeonid (talk) 17:01, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Martin Scorsese
Thanks for the offer but not an area in which I have much knowledge (or interest). Good luck with it.&mdash; Rod talk 16:11, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Still with thanks for your dab edit on the article. CodexJustin (talk) 16:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Martin Scorsese
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Martin Scorsese has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

As I made my first pass editing the article I began adding "Citation Needed" tags where necessary. I soon realized that this would simply clutter up the article because there are dozens of statements, particularly in earlier sections, that require citations. For this reason I added a tag at the top of the article. It is particularly important that a number of statements about his personal life are cited. To fully cite the article is going to require hours of work, but until this is done there is no chance the article will pass a GA review. This shouldn't prevent you from seeking a Peer Review as the citations are found.

I was going to suggest "surgery" to the Upcoming Projects section. I'm glad to see you have removed all the speculation.

Best of luck with the article moving forward.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:28, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * It was nice of you to do that article so quickly. I have started on the citations already which may take some extra time. CodexJustin (talk) 16:33, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Star Is Born (2018 film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article A Star Is Born (2018 film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Filmman3000 -- Filmman3000 (talk) 22:01, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Need your help, some clowns vandalised and raped the Christopher Layne page on some drivel about the article being "linkfarm", thanks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Layne

112.199.181.130 (talk) 13:07, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Star Is Born (2018 film)
The article A Star Is Born (2018 film) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:A Star Is Born (2018 film) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Filmman3000 -- Filmman3000 (talk) 04:02, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Hannah Arendt
Hannah Arendt has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. &#32;- car chasm (talk) 02:55, 19 February 2023 (UTC)